Leo, (01)
I think this is an accurate way of characterizing the differences - with one
qualification. WordNet is only a synonym set - it is not a thesaurus. We
looked at WordNet many, many years ago and found we could not use it to describe
any of our domains in a meaningful way. (02)
We opted instead for a rich domain thesaurus based on concepts and using a
richer set of semantic relationships. We actually find that the same
relationships among the concepts can be used to define relationships among the
entities (ie the values of relationships among entities in our data/entity
models). The difference in the two is that the data model for concepts may be
simpler than the data model for other types of entities. It is equivalent to
the difference between the 'name of a country' and the data model for a country
entity. For us, though, WordNet did not provide sufficient support for the
concept level - name of the country. (03)
I hope this makes sense to others. My own thought model is so adapted to this
approach that I'm never sure when I'm explaining it clearly. (04)
Best regards,
Denise (05)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/ontac-forum/
To Post: mailto:ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontac-forum/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/ontac/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/OntologyTaxonomyCoordinatingWG (06)
|